I guess it is my bad for not making it clear that I wasn't suggesting using one isolated play to make some kind of final determination on a players worth, versus 1000's of numbers derived form a stats sheet.

Let's get even more hypothetical. A PG consistently gets into time clock problems as he pounds the ball trying to get his own shot off. As the seconds wind down, he consistently makes desperation drives to the hoop, hoping something will open up, or maybe believing he will attract defenders to him and there will be an easy pass available. Of course, his defenders know this will happen, because he does it over and over again so their are staying in front of him (he doesn't have the ability to ball handle around them, or the speed) and they also close off the passing lanes. So our PG winds up making his last second desperation pass anyway, to a wing who is trying to get open for a pass, knowing the PG is going to desperately need someone to pass to, and has just .5 seconds to make the shot. This low percentage shot misses. The PG does not get dinged. The shooter does. If this happens over and over again, the stats are skewed and do not represent a good picture of where the problem lies with the offence when this particular player is on the floor.

If you don't see my point, then never mind. Let's talk about something else.

But the PG does get 'dinged' with low scoring and low assist numbers. When you see that you can question just how 'good' of a PG that player really is.

to me the stat that gets artificially inflated by playing on a bad team is ppg. an average or good shooter on a bad team can easily up his points and touches when surrounded by bad players. the perfect example of this is MJ. mike james was a shot happy chucker who was able to jump 10 points by playing on our team. assist numbers go up when the pg has players who can shoot. fg% goes up when players have a pg who can break down defense and pass out. everyones defence goes up when someone protects the rim consistantly.

in this argument i see it very simply jose made jack expendable and lowry is making jose expendable.

As for bayless, dude loved to pound the air outta the rock. That was evident in almost every possession he was on the floor. Some refer to it as having limited court vision. Guys see the floor and the plays developing differently in real time, some get it some don't. Maybe there are numbers to explain that. Maybe once you factor in 1000's of occurrences and average it out over thousands of minutes vs 1000s of guys you get an average. Point being, no matter what the average says, JB over dribbled and went one on one far too often and was easily goaded into Mano a Mano battles. So was mike James whose numbers, with the Raps, across the board were close to or better than JJ or KLs. But he's a shit player. Always has been always will.

Numbers can be deceiving. Especially out of context

You in no way showed numbers were deceiving in that entire paragraph. You rather only pointed out what you thought was happening and what was true and not what necessarily did.

I pointed out exactly what I saw every game I watched (which is most raps games in any given season, it's a guess but I'd say I see about 70-75 games per season). Are you going to tell me, wi numbers, that he was a better pg than I'm giving him credit for? How about the mike James scenario? If he was as good as the digits say he was in Toronto then why was he never a starting, borderline all star on any other squad?

In other news: your second sentence makes zero sense. And in none of your arguments are you proving, with numbers, that what I'm seeing isn't accurate or in any way less valuable than stats. You just want to keep saying what I'm seeing is not worth what your spreadsheet is whispering in your ear. Must be nice being able to look at the matrix all day for your basketball fix 'cuz cable is mad expensive. If you want to believe that imperfect analytics are more important or more valuable than the good ol eye test that's fine but you aren't arguing your point very well. You also keep ignoring the fact that I've stated over n over again that it's the use of stats (especially those presented in the OP) in a vacuum that is pointless and not the stats themselves. Have fun eating your steak with a spoon.

I pointed out exactly what I saw every game I watched (which is most raps games in any given season, it's a guess but I'd say I see about 70-75 games per season). Are you going to tell me, wi numbers, that he was a better pg than I'm giving him credit for? How about the mike James scenario? If he was as good as the digits say he was in Toronto then why was he never a starting, borderline all star on any other squad?

In other news: your second sentence makes zero sense. And in none of your arguments are you proving, with numbers, that what I'm seeing isn't accurate or in any way less valuable than stats. You just want to keep saying what I'm seeing is not worth what your spreadsheet is whispering in your ear. Must be nice being able to look at the matrix all day for your basketball fix 'cuz cable is mad expensive. If you want to believe that imperfect analytics are more important or more valuable than the good ol eye test that's fine but you aren't arguing your point very well. You also keep ignoring the fact that I've stated over n over again that it's the use of stats (especially those presented in the OP) in a vacuum that is pointless and not the stats themselves. Have fun eating your steak with a spoon.

WHo cares about just the Raptors? This is about Lowry (never played a game for the Raptors) and Jack (only a Raptor for 1 season and a bit). What was different about the two systems from these players respective teams in the years given? How many of there games did you watch to come to the conclusion about them and their systems without stats

Why was Mike James not a starter or all-star for another team? I don't know. I don't pretend to know I have all the information about the details of all other teams. Fought with a coach? Teams thought they could turn him into a pass oriented PG rather than a shoot first PG? He got a contract and stopped trying? You tell me, without using stats if you like, exactly why.

And I am in NO WAY saying what you see is wrong, or that the 'spreadsheet' is right. I'm telling you the 'facts' you think you know aren't actually 'facts'. And therefore the information presented in the statistics are not even remotely close to being wrong.

Like I keep saying one without the other is viewing it in a vacuum. You keep missing that point. I have seen enough of Lowry and jack on league pass and read enough about them and have looked at far more numbers than the OP presented in comparing Lowry to guards who, on the surface, have a similar game. If you think looking at the comparison presented by the OP is a fair one than that is foolish. Which is the point I keep trying to make. Of course when discussing what I see as the game is actually being played I'm going to rely on the team I watch the most and that is the Raptors. I'm not reaching for guys I don't watch all that much. I happen to have had both jack and Lowry on my fantasy squad last year and access to LP so I watched more of their games as a result of a relevant interest. If you want to keep cherry picking my argument (that stats in a vacuum are pretty worthless) go ahead we can agree to disagree. If you want to try to tell me what I'm watching and seeing and making note of is inaccurate then I'm going to defend it by saying stats are imperfect and tell only a portion of the story. Even the Henry Abbots and John Hollingers of the world are the first to admit as much.

As for Mike James its a couple of things. Over dribbling, over shooting, and relative inefficiency. Like I said this is a TEAM game where individual stats are interesting but say very little about the impact said player has on the team. Basketball is at its best (imo) when the ball is moving and finding the open man, not when one guy is hotdogging it and calls his own number all the time. That one on one shit is boring and easy for teams to defend against, especially late in the clock/game. Undersized guards who shoot first, second and third, like mike James and Ben Gordon, just don't help a team win on a consistent basis because once the D loads up on them the rest of the team is out of synch, cold whatever. Even the real MJ realized that to win he'd have to trust his teammates and keep them involved.

Rumor has it (hearsay from a friend of mine who worked at the hotel Mike James lived at in Toronto) was that he was also a staggering drunk who would be boozing it up in the hotel bar to the wee hours. Like I said, hearsay, but being an alcoholic with a temper and over sized ego isn't easy to work with.

Like I keep saying one without the other is viewing it in a vacuum. You keep missing that point. I have seen enough of Lowry and jack on league pass and read enough about them and have looked at far more numbers than the OP presented in comparing Lowry to guards who, on the surface, have a similar game. If you think looking at the comparison presented by the OP is a fair one than that is foolish. Which is the point I keep trying to make. Of course when discussing what I see as the game is actually being played I'm going to rely on the team I watch the most and that is the Raptors. I'm not reaching for guys I don't watch all that much. I happen to have had both jack and Lowry on my fantasy squad last year and access to LP so I watched more of their games as a result of a relevant interest. If you want to keep cherry picking my argument (that stats in a vacuum are pretty worthless) go ahead we can agree to disagree. If you want to try to tell me what I'm watching and seeing and making note of is inaccurate then I'm going to defend it by saying stats are imperfect and tell only a portion of the story. Even the Henry Abbots and John Hollingers of the world are the first to admit as much.

Well I have yet to hear what 'systems' they run... which was the basis as to why the stats are inaccurate.

But, not you didn't keep saying viewing one without the other is viewing in a vacuum. Rather you said that "why you need to watch the game and ignore the stats (for the most part)." and then changed it to " comparing digits in a vacuum is nearly pointless" - which is a far cry from what you are saying now. You also mentioned that what saw were 'facts'.

happen to have had both jack and Lowry on my fantasy squad last year

Whoops, we might have the actual reason why the given stats are wrong right? because Lowry is better than Jack in fantasy basketball....... I know, now you are going to tell me that you aren't basing your opinion on fantasy basketball and the amount of games (which was 'enough') is really what you basing your 'facts' on.

I did say "for the most part" I also said I wasn't clear and tried to clarify my point.

The only thing, and I pointed this out if you'd care to actually read what I wrote, about them both being on my squad (had a shitty draft position as you may be able to tell) was that it lead me to actually watch their games. Not just rely on what any numbers nerd (like abott or hollinger) would instantly discredit as mostly invaluable and misleading: basic box score (as presented in the OP).

At any rate I've put forth some solid arguments to which all you've replied with is that my eyes can't tell ish and that stats are the only truth. If that works for you and is where you derive pleasure from pro ball so be it. I choose to watch and trust what I see. If I've any questions about what I'm seeing or need added, more complete information I look at the numbers.

And it's not a far cry. Simply put individual numbers in a vacuum are nearly pointless considering the many other factors that most be assessed such as the other guys on the floor, system opponent etc.

Latly if you want to know more about their offensive and defensive schemes I highly suggest Coach Nicks breakdowns and NBA Playbook on Youtube as a start. Google is your friend.

OMG. That is sooooo lame. Don't you know that people in the know, and I'm talking professional scouts, GMs, NBA coaches and their assistants don't even go to games anymore when they are making decisions about the draft or trades. They just look at the numbers. That is where the truth is....No wait a minute. They actually DO go out and watch players during games, and spend hours looking at tapes. Boy, do they have a lot to learn.

First I'll say that using 1 play vs an entire seasons worth of numbers will ofcourse give a completely different view. Thats why sample is important.

But, to the exact example... why did Bayless dribble out the clock? For fun? Because the defense was doing a good job on him or his teammates? Were his teammates not getting open? Was that the play call?

Why did Bayless pass rather than shoot? Poor decision making? Good defense? Did his teammate get open at the last moment?

What caused the bad pass? Bayless just being a poor passer? The defense forcing him into it? Did his teammate change position unexpectedly?

Many teams, including the Raptors, subscribe to Synergy Sports so they can determine what happened.

A large sample size would probably show the play Puffer described occurs with a much higher frequency with Bayless than with Calderon.

Craiger wrote:

And lets compare that to taking 1000s of occurences that take place, try to average them out to come to the most common result, rationalize them against the 1000s of other occurences that take place by players and teams throughout the league and history. We can now get an idea where 1 occurence has no effect on the overrall picture.

Bayless did not run any one play anywhere close to 1,000 times last year, let alone with the same personnel on the floor. I am too lazy to check but my guess is teams have roughly 100-110 possessions per game, 8,000-9,000 per season. A specific data point is not as insignificant as what you are suggesting when measuring the player's performance.

First off puffer, I'm not sure what you're saying here. Do they or don't they watch the games?

lol, scouts gms et al don't watch THOUSANDS of posessions, constantly cruise Synergy AND actually go to games! Do you even watch March Madness? They show the NBA scouts and big wigs in the stands all the time.

Last edited by minks77; Tue Sep 11th, 2012 at 07:22 AM.
Reason: to clarify AND play nice :)

Of course the professionals who making a living analysing players watch the games. They do it because stats don't tell the whole story. If professionals can't tell all they need to know strictly from stats, then I don't think anyone posting on this board can. You are absolutely correct. "...one without the other is viewing it in a vacuum..."

Since the professionals depend on the eyeball test, in conjunction with statistical analysis, then I don't think you need to add anything else to your argument.

Remember the story about JYD hopping in his truck and driving straight here in a snowstorm when he was traded? Or Jalen showing up in the custom jacket, day one? love those stories. Nice change of pace from "no one ever wants to play here" line.

Guess Twitter is the new ugly jacket. At least he spelled Canada correctly. Welcome to your new home KLow...